Soering v United Kingdom
Extraditing a person to a country where he faces a real risk of treatment contrary to article 3, such as the death row phenomenon, would breach the Convention.
Facts
Jens Soering, a German national, was accused of murdering his girlfriend's parents in Virginia, in the United States. He was arrested in England, and the United States requested his extradition to face charges of capital murder. If convicted, he faced the death penalty, and would probably spend many years on death row, in harsh conditions, awaiting execution. He claimed that extradition would breach article 3.
Legal principle
The European Court of Human Rights held that extradition would breach article 3. The court said that the decision of a contracting state to extradite a fugitive may engage its responsibility under article 3 where substantial grounds have been shown for believing that the person concerned, if extradited, faces a real risk of being subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in the requesting country. Having regard to the very long period of time spent on death row in extreme conditions, with the ever present anguish of awaiting execution, and to Soering's age and mental state, extradition would expose him to a real risk of treatment beyond the threshold of article 3. He was later extradited after assurances that the death penalty would not be sought.
Related cases on prohibition of torture and inhuman treatment (article 3)
- A v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2) [2005] UKHL 71, [2006] 2 AC 221
- A v United Kingdom (1999) 27 EHRR 611
- AM (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] UKSC 17, [2021] AC 633
- Chahal v United Kingdom (1997) 23 EHRR 413
- Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v DSD [2018] UKSC 11, [2019] AC 196
- Gäfgen v Germany (2011) 52 EHRR 1
- Ireland v United Kingdom (1979) 2 EHRR 25
- R (AAA) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] UKSC 42
Studying human rights law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
